ArticleBMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation2025
Interventional effects of different track and field sports on human cardiovascular function indicators and physiological energy metabolism.
Article in BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- SLJ is associated with multiple field-based fitness indicators in young adult males.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo analyze the effects of different track and field events on human cardiovascular function and physiological energy metabolism.
methodThe research subjects were ordinary male students majoring in physical education at a certain university, aged between 18 and 25 years old. A total of 42 people were divided into four sub sample groups: sprint group (10 people), jump group (10 people), long-distance running group (10 people), and regular student group (12 people). The COSMED K5 portable gas metabolism analysis system was used to measure cardiopulmonary function, and key indicators such as Maximum Oxygen Uptake (VO
resultThe weight, systolic blood pressure, and diastolic blood pressure of different populations were not statistically significant in a quiet state (p > 0.05). The waist to hip ratios of the short-distance and long-distance running teams were 0.75 ± 0.03 and 0.76 ± 0.03, respectively, which showed significant differences compared to ordinary students (p < 0.05). There was also a significant difference in heart rate between different track and field teams and ordinary students in a quiet state (p < 0.05). The termination load of different track and field teams varied, with the long-distance running team having the highest load (p < 0.01), followed by the jumping team. Compared with ordinary students, there was a significant difference (p < 0.05) in the termination heart rate among the sprinting, long-distance, and jumping teams. However, there was p > 0.05 in the systolic blood pressure index among the four groups of subjects. There was a significant difference (p < 0.05) in diastolic blood pressure between sprinting and jumping teams and ordinary students. In a quiet state, the energy metabolism of long-distance running teams, sprinting teams, jumping teams, and ordinary students was 1.52 ± 0.64, 1.81 ± 0.91, 1.86 ± 0.87, and 2.87 ± 0.96, respectively.
conclusionIn a quiet state, there are significant differences in body shape and function between different track and field training teams and the general population. In a quantitative load state, long-distance runners have the strongest adaptability to load.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.